145
145
Dec 9, 2012
12/12
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 145
favorite 0
quote 0
the supreme court is taking up a prop 8 and a doma case. does the president need to take a stronger stance on this now? >> i think he should. both on the substance and the politics. the constitution clearly states every american has equal rights under the law. that includes the right for loving committed couples to get married. it's a no brainer. on the pollices, as you said, that 53% support, it shot up ten points in two years. america is at a tipping point on this issue. you are right about the young people. they are going to be the majority of the electorate over the next two presidential cycles. they are already a voice in a n. it's all upside for the president and the democrats. >> erin, i'm going to get you to weigh in after the break on the president's legacy on this issue. >>> and the must-reads, the picks after this. citracal slow release continuously releases calcium plus d with efficient absorption in one daily dose. citracal slow release. with efficient absorption in one daily dose. is bigger than we think ... sometimelike the f
the supreme court is taking up a prop 8 and a doma case. does the president need to take a stronger stance on this now? >> i think he should. both on the substance and the politics. the constitution clearly states every american has equal rights under the law. that includes the right for loving committed couples to get married. it's a no brainer. on the pollices, as you said, that 53% support, it shot up ten points in two years. america is at a tipping point on this issue. you are right...
170
170
Dec 9, 2012
12/12
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 170
favorite 0
quote 0
doma cases are slightly different. i think the doma challenge is much narrower challenge and i expect it to be much more optimistic about a kind of flat-out ruling that this is unconstitutional by the supreme court. the reason i think that, melissa, doma doesn't require any state to change its marriage laws. all it says is the federal government is going to return to what the federal government was always doing before. we were talking about federalism issues earlier in the show. in the history of marriage, the federal government has always deferred to state definitions of marriage. let me give you an example. some states allow first cousins to marry, others don't because of prohibitions, incest concerns and things like that. whatever the state definitions are, the federal government has always followed the state definition. if a state says they're married, the federal government says for the purposes of benefits they're married. in 1996, the defense of marriage act departed from that practice and said the federal gover
doma cases are slightly different. i think the doma challenge is much narrower challenge and i expect it to be much more optimistic about a kind of flat-out ruling that this is unconstitutional by the supreme court. the reason i think that, melissa, doma doesn't require any state to change its marriage laws. all it says is the federal government is going to return to what the federal government was always doing before. we were talking about federalism issues earlier in the show. in the history...
144
144
Jun 24, 2012
06/12
by
MSNBC
tv
eye 144
favorite 0
quote 0
. >> kenji, one of the important ones doma, and the position on doma. where is that progressing? the administration taken a position on it, but it's not over yet. >> absolutely this will be a blockbuster term, the upcoming term, even though everyone is focusing on this one as understandably with health care being such a huge term. next year will be a huge one as well. civil rights issues. both the perry case and douma case will get appealed. the perry case is the california prop 8 case, and the doma case is from massachusetts. the issue on doma and everyone is hoping on the progressive side that the doma case goes up first, it's a smaller bite to ask for from the supreme court, on progress and gay rights. >> because it's just one state? actually, because all it's doing is saying that if a state allows for same-sex marriage, then the federal government has to abide by that decision. so it would not actually change the definition of marriage in any of the 50 states. whereas the other case, the california prop 8 case if it goes up to the supreme court, potentially the supreme court
. >> kenji, one of the important ones doma, and the position on doma. where is that progressing? the administration taken a position on it, but it's not over yet. >> absolutely this will be a blockbuster term, the upcoming term, even though everyone is focusing on this one as understandably with health care being such a huge term. next year will be a huge one as well. civil rights issues. both the perry case and douma case will get appealed. the perry case is the california prop 8...
228
228
Dec 8, 2012
12/12
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 228
favorite 0
quote 0
cheryl harris says "i think doma women get shut down quickly on solid legal grounds. prop 8 harder but kennedy will clear it up." >>> next the tug-of-war over the fiscal cliff. how much are democrats willing to give our entitlement cuts? we'll ask congressman elijah cummings that question. >>> the fight on capitol hill convinces a big powerball winner to claim his fortune now. you're watching "weekends with alex witt." [ woman ] ring. ring. progresso. in what world do potatoes, bacon and cheese add up to 100 calories? your world. ♪ [ whispers ] real bacon... creamy cheese... 100 calories... [ chef ] ma'am [ male announcer ] progresso. you gotta taste this soup. i tell them dentures are very different to real teeth. they're about 10 times softer and may have surface pores where bacteria can grow and multiply. polident is specifically designed to clean dentures daily. its unique micro-clean formula kills 99.9% of odor causing bacteria and helps dissolve stains, cleaning in a better way than brushing with toothpaste. that's why i recommend using polident. [ male announ
cheryl harris says "i think doma women get shut down quickly on solid legal grounds. prop 8 harder but kennedy will clear it up." >>> next the tug-of-war over the fiscal cliff. how much are democrats willing to give our entitlement cuts? we'll ask congressman elijah cummings that question. >>> the fight on capitol hill convinces a big powerball winner to claim his fortune now. you're watching "weekends with alex witt." [ woman ] ring. ring. progresso. in...
101
101
Dec 1, 2012
12/12
by
KQED
tv
eye 101
favorite 0
quote 0
. >> doma covers the whole country and federal law. how do the two things interact with each other. >> they have almost a dozen cases involving same-sex marriage before them right now. >> also define doma, if you would. >> the defensive marriage act passed in 1996 which says for federal tax and other federal purposes, marriage shall be defined only between a man and a woman. so a couple of different federal court of appeals in the second circuit and the first circuit have struck down that aspect of doma, saying that the federal government has to treat same-sex married couples from those states that recognize same-sex marriage as married for federal purposes. so i think a lot of people properly speculate that the supreme court will have to take at least one of these doma cases, because when lower courts are struck down in aederal statute, that's a big deal, and we have to get a resolution of that. whether the preme court says at the same time it's going to go ahead and take the prop 8 case alongside or whether it will take a doma case a
. >> doma covers the whole country and federal law. how do the two things interact with each other. >> they have almost a dozen cases involving same-sex marriage before them right now. >> also define doma, if you would. >> the defensive marriage act passed in 1996 which says for federal tax and other federal purposes, marriage shall be defined only between a man and a woman. so a couple of different federal court of appeals in the second circuit and the first circuit...
218
218
Dec 16, 2012
12/12
by
KRCB
tv
eye 218
favorite 0
quote 0
one is the defense of marriage act, doma, passed by congress in 1996. the other is the famous proposition 8, in caiforni which would hav fordden same-sex marriage in that state. >> four years ago, voters in california approved proposition 8, an amendment to the state's constitution banning same-sex marriage in the state, only to have it overturned two years later by a federal judge who said the amendment denied gays and lesbians the equal protection of the law guaranteed by the u.s. constitution. >> "today, we are more american because of this decision..." >> a huge decision that would require all states to recognize gay marriage should the u.s. supreme court agree. the second case involves the federal defense of marriage act-doma, for short. the law denies same-sex couples who marry the same federal benefits routinely accorded heterosexual marriages, including many tax benefits like the right to file a joint return. doma is being challenged by edie windsor, whose relationship with thea spayer spanned more than 40 years. they had met in the early sixtie
one is the defense of marriage act, doma, passed by congress in 1996. the other is the famous proposition 8, in caiforni which would hav fordden same-sex marriage in that state. >> four years ago, voters in california approved proposition 8, an amendment to the state's constitution banning same-sex marriage in the state, only to have it overturned two years later by a federal judge who said the amendment denied gays and lesbians the equal protection of the law guaranteed by the u.s....
131
131
Jun 1, 2012
06/12
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 131
favorite 0
quote 0
the bipartisan legal advisory group was created and exists solely for them to continue to fight doma through the courts. important to mention this is section 3, federal employee benefits and does not strike down at all the clause of the defense of marriage act that permits states to reject marriages of same-sex couples that take place in other states so, for example, when my moms go down to visit family in florida, regardless of the ruling on this particular issue by the supreme court, my moms aren't married when they step off that plane in florida, so as david mentioned there is still a long ways to go when it dose to this law. >> david boies, let's talk about that long way to go. the issue that zach is talking about regarding his mothers, when this case goes to the supreme court, presumably all aspects of the law will be considered. >> you can't be sure of that. most likely, only the part of the law that was decided in this case will go to the supreme court in this case. now, the supreme court might reach out and deal with both sections of the law. but i think that it's more likely
the bipartisan legal advisory group was created and exists solely for them to continue to fight doma through the courts. important to mention this is section 3, federal employee benefits and does not strike down at all the clause of the defense of marriage act that permits states to reject marriages of same-sex couples that take place in other states so, for example, when my moms go down to visit family in florida, regardless of the ruling on this particular issue by the supreme court, my moms...
188
188
Dec 8, 2012
12/12
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 188
favorite 0
quote 0
. >> the other case involves doma, defense of marriage act. what's at the heart of that question? >> not the fundamental right of same-sex marriage but whether the federal government can define marriage in a certain way, as between one man and one woman. historically that's been the job of the states to decide what marriage is, to define it. that really is the federal government stepping somewhere where it hasn't before. what they have done with that statute is say people can't have thousands of federal benefits. the case before the supreme court involves a woman who had to pay $363,000 in estate taxes she wouldn't have had to pay just because the person she was married to was the same gender as herself. it's fairness but limbed to that one state. >> patricia, always good to see you. thanks for weighing in. >> thank you. >> the deadline for the fiscal cliff is just over three weeks away. lawmakers are still mired in part in gridlock, each side saying the other is to blame. what do their constituents think? cnbc says 21% would blame the president, 23% blame republicans, 52 blame ea
. >> the other case involves doma, defense of marriage act. what's at the heart of that question? >> not the fundamental right of same-sex marriage but whether the federal government can define marriage in a certain way, as between one man and one woman. historically that's been the job of the states to decide what marriage is, to define it. that really is the federal government stepping somewhere where it hasn't before. what they have done with that statute is say people can't have...
88
88
Dec 8, 2012
12/12
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 88
favorite 0
quote 0
the doma case doesn't affect any state decisions. where the perry case, the outcome -- >> that's the prop 8 case in california. >> exactly. thank you for helping me out there. the perry case says there's this definition passed by a ballot initiative in 2008 that says that marriage is between one man and one woman. if the the supreme court goes broad on that and says there's a fundamental right for same-sex couples to marry, that could flip the remaining 41 states that don't have same-sex marriage to require them to have same-sex marriage. i don't think that's going to happen. i think there's many weigh stations between 0 and 50. for example, the court could look at this and say there are a bunch of states, eight states that say we're going to give you the rights and benefits of marriage but we're going to withhold the word marriage. the court can look and say you're worried about is brand. all you're saying is if you let gays into marriage that's going to diminish the brand. we're going to strike that down. we're going to add those s
the doma case doesn't affect any state decisions. where the perry case, the outcome -- >> that's the prop 8 case in california. >> exactly. thank you for helping me out there. the perry case says there's this definition passed by a ballot initiative in 2008 that says that marriage is between one man and one woman. if the the supreme court goes broad on that and says there's a fundamental right for same-sex couples to marry, that could flip the remaining 41 states that don't have...
169
169
Jul 24, 2012
07/12
by
CURRENT
tv
eye 169
favorite 0
quote 0
chris, i want to understand doma a little bit better. defense of marriage act. if that was out of the way would tam have had the benefits that she would have with her 27 year partner or no. >> this is the problem with having a law like doma that has the country has evolved and places like california have had relationships there are a lot of changes in the same that same-sex couples were living their lives. now there are questions about what benefits they would be able to have if doma was gone. because obviously a lot of the federal benefits currently relate to marriage laws. so even if we got rid of the defensive marriage act, when a couple isn't legally married in that state, there would be a whole lot of questions on how we treat those couples. and it sounded like tam and sally would have been in that situation. >> one more quick thing about doma. my understanding was it allowed states to say -- like alabama, we don't want to recognize the gay marriage act that was recognized in massachusetts. but does it also have a federal component. >> yeah, back when it wa
chris, i want to understand doma a little bit better. defense of marriage act. if that was out of the way would tam have had the benefits that she would have with her 27 year partner or no. >> this is the problem with having a law like doma that has the country has evolved and places like california have had relationships there are a lot of changes in the same that same-sex couples were living their lives. now there are questions about what benefits they would be able to have if doma was...
177
177
Sep 29, 2012
09/12
by
MSNBC
tv
eye 177
favorite 0
quote 0
doma is a little more complicated. the statute was declared unconstitutional. normally that's a ticket right into supreme court review, but the case where that was declared unconstitutional, justice kagan is recused from. so they would have to decide it with an eight-member court. affirmative action is going to be argued october 10th. it's hard to be optimistic. the court has changed a lot since the last affirmative action case. justice o'connor, who wrote the opinion there was a swing vote, is gone. justice kagan is recused from that case, as well. so it's going to be very, very hard. and justice kennedy normally a swing vote descended strongly from the last time affirmative action was upheld. it is hard to figure out how texas is going to get majority votes in that case. but they're fighting hard and i'm sure are as optimistic as can be. >> great speaking with you. thank you so much for your insights. >> thank you. >>> coming up next, president obama's big lead in ohio. what's making the difference there in the buckeye state? you're watching "weekends with al
doma is a little more complicated. the statute was declared unconstitutional. normally that's a ticket right into supreme court review, but the case where that was declared unconstitutional, justice kagan is recused from. so they would have to decide it with an eight-member court. affirmative action is going to be argued october 10th. it's hard to be optimistic. the court has changed a lot since the last affirmative action case. justice o'connor, who wrote the opinion there was a swing vote, is...
152
152
May 13, 2012
05/12
by
CSPAN
tv
eye 152
favorite 0
quote 0
first of all, it is not a violation of doma. second, i think this amendment is a violation of the first amendment freedom of religion rights of that faith minister and of those service members. there's a difference between legal marriage and the religious ceremony that commemorates a marriage. i completely agree that a rule or statute of the department of defense that purports to authorize the legal institute demerit among service members would be outside the jurisdiction of what the department does. no one is suggesting that should be the case. we are suggesting that if a chaplain chooses to perform a religious ceremony voluntarily that involves two service members of the same gender. the exclusion of the right to do that with two people different agendas differently it -- is a violation of religious freedom. no one has to accept as a religious doctrine same-sex marriage. i would be the first one to vote against and speak against any rule that says the catholic priest has to perform a same-sex marriage. or an orthodox rabbi or
first of all, it is not a violation of doma. second, i think this amendment is a violation of the first amendment freedom of religion rights of that faith minister and of those service members. there's a difference between legal marriage and the religious ceremony that commemorates a marriage. i completely agree that a rule or statute of the department of defense that purports to authorize the legal institute demerit among service members would be outside the jurisdiction of what the department...
130
130
Feb 24, 2012
02/12
by
CURRENT
tv
eye 130
favorite 0
quote 0
i mentioned doma and he also know about don't ask don't tell and he abolished that. there's one place i will agree on, that is barack obama should evolve already and the reason is because it allows people like christie to hide behind the president and we saw that again today. in the court case in california overturning proposition eight those that wanted to move it to the full ninth circuit, they had cited barack obama, just like christie did as a reason why that it was not discriminatory to ban marriage equality in california. >> there's something about evolution and the people's opinions. the governor claims that the president is trying to have it both ways when he shouted on that set, this is the sort of political cow wardice we don't want. he has not let a personal opinion interfere with a policy decision which is the reverse of christie. >> christie looks at the polls showing 70% of people 18-30 right now support marriage equality. he sees the writing on the wall. just today maryland became the eighth state to approve same-sex marriage around it's very exciting.
i mentioned doma and he also know about don't ask don't tell and he abolished that. there's one place i will agree on, that is barack obama should evolve already and the reason is because it allows people like christie to hide behind the president and we saw that again today. in the court case in california overturning proposition eight those that wanted to move it to the full ninth circuit, they had cited barack obama, just like christie did as a reason why that it was not discriminatory to...
160
160
Dec 8, 2012
12/12
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 160
favorite 0
quote 0
what doma says is two things. one state does not have to recognize the marriage law, same-sex marriage law, of another state. that would be struck down and then there would have to be another test as to full faith and credit. >> if you move from california to utah and you're getting the recognized marriage in california but not in utah, but in utah living in salt lake city you'd be able to get social security benefits and all the federal stuff. >> you would -- it's not clear. >> it would depend how the court rules in that case. >> if the court reaches the question of full faith and credit, what that is, utah must recognize the marriage laws of california, then, yes -- >> but you'd still be getting your social security checks, wouldn't you? >> it's not clear -- >> let's go back to a clear case. if prop 8 -- if the decision by the ninth , if the decision to strike that down, if that is upheld, where do we stand? what does that do? is equality then the law of the land? is marriage equality the law of land? >> it woul
what doma says is two things. one state does not have to recognize the marriage law, same-sex marriage law, of another state. that would be struck down and then there would have to be another test as to full faith and credit. >> if you move from california to utah and you're getting the recognized marriage in california but not in utah, but in utah living in salt lake city you'd be able to get social security benefits and all the federal stuff. >> you would -- it's not clear....
141
141
Nov 30, 2012
11/12
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 141
favorite 0
quote 0
who is going to defend doma before the high court? >> it's actually already happened because in the federal appeals courts when the justice department said it couldn't anymore defend a law because it concluded it was unconstitutional, house republicans stepped into carry on the legal battle and they are already here in the supreme court asking the court to take these cases. so they would defend the law. >> pete williams our man at the supreme court and we should note if there is a development here during this hour, of course pete will come back and we'll break it live. >> you bet. >>> let's bring in constitutional law expert robert shapiro. he's also a former clerk for retired supreme court justice john paul stevens. good afternoon to you, sir. >> good afternoon. >> as more states legalize same-sex marriage, is there going to be more pressure on the justices to address this issue? >> absolutely. i think the justices inevitably react to the trends that they see around. and as more and more states do it, this issue of what is going to b
who is going to defend doma before the high court? >> it's actually already happened because in the federal appeals courts when the justice department said it couldn't anymore defend a law because it concluded it was unconstitutional, house republicans stepped into carry on the legal battle and they are already here in the supreme court asking the court to take these cases. so they would defend the law. >> pete williams our man at the supreme court and we should note if there is a...
114
114
Dec 8, 2012
12/12
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 114
favorite 0
quote 0
is doma doomed? >> i think it is. there are four district courts say i saying it violated the rights of gay and lesbian couples. there are two court of appeals. so there's
is doma doomed? >> i think it is. there are four district courts say i saying it violated the rights of gay and lesbian couples. there are two court of appeals. so there's
220
220
Dec 29, 2012
12/12
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 220
favorite 0
quote 1
. >> doma. that said that the federal government will not respect gay couples marriages in maine and other states where it's legal and proposition 8, the ban on marriage equality in california is up before the courts. and then we are fighting in 5 states. we want to win in five states before the court issues the ruling. >> in regard to doma, it said, if your side wins the battle, that may end the battle in many states, is that true? >> what the doma will do, it respects marriages in states where the states have decided that gay couples can marry. it will say, the marriages will be treated equal in those states. >> the president has strong feelings on gay and lesbian issues. what more would you like to see from the white house? >> obviously, president obama has been fantast ta-- been fant has spoken out in a heartfelt way. he has been fantastic. >> all right, good to have you with us. thank you for coming in. national campaign director for freedom to marry. a plan to train teachers in his state t
. >> doma. that said that the federal government will not respect gay couples marriages in maine and other states where it's legal and proposition 8, the ban on marriage equality in california is up before the courts. and then we are fighting in 5 states. we want to win in five states before the court issues the ruling. >> in regard to doma, it said, if your side wins the battle, that may end the battle in many states, is that true? >> what the doma will do, it respects...
127
127
Dec 8, 2012
12/12
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 127
favorite 0
quote 0
it happened on the doma issue. because doma does address the general issue of man, woman, marriage. but then you have california, prop 8 and prop 8 struck down and movement in california. other states that have legal i seed gay marriage. maryland, for instance. so, it's not like the feds are going to try to enforce dome marks right? >> two different issues. one is criminal and one is something totally different. >> right, it's still selective. i'm not making a judgment. it's interesting that there are these conflicts. and this happens on not a lot of issues. and what's the latest with you on -- your name is so difficult to say but anna hita, what's your take on the pot issue? >> my take is that i would urge washington pot smokers not to rush out and pull out the cheetoes quite yet. because under federal law it is illegal to possess, to sell, to smoke pot. we know that federal law trumps state law. so i think not only will the federal -- the feds have an obligation to get in there and ensure that their laws are upheld. >> laura: their laws are on the books. whether immigration, their
it happened on the doma issue. because doma does address the general issue of man, woman, marriage. but then you have california, prop 8 and prop 8 struck down and movement in california. other states that have legal i seed gay marriage. maryland, for instance. so, it's not like the feds are going to try to enforce dome marks right? >> two different issues. one is criminal and one is something totally different. >> right, it's still selective. i'm not making a judgment. it's...
63
63
Dec 10, 2012
12/12
by
MSNBC
tv
eye 63
favorite 0
quote 0
when the supremes get down to assessing doma, we can expect the conservatives to defend doma and the liberals to strike it down. the comp significance of the majority will be determined by the votes of chief justice roberts who has shown he's willing to leave the conservatives if he feels the court's legacy is in peril and kenne kennedy. he wrote the constitution prohibits laws singling out a certain class of citizens for disfavored legal status. it appears doma will get tossed in the dust bin of history. the courts other gay rights case comes from california which gave gays the right to marry and then with proposition 8 took it away. taking away an existing right because of animus was prohibited by the court in a '96 decision authored by justice kennedy. but where the doma case asks can the federal government discriminate against married couple, the prop 8 case asks can states bar gays from marrying. kennedy has the opportunity to liberate california or create a gay roe v. wade. s acceptance is only growing. kennedy can only give the gay rights movement a decisive final
when the supremes get down to assessing doma, we can expect the conservatives to defend doma and the liberals to strike it down. the comp significance of the majority will be determined by the votes of chief justice roberts who has shown he's willing to leave the conservatives if he feels the court's legacy is in peril and kenne kennedy. he wrote the constitution prohibits laws singling out a certain class of citizens for disfavored legal status. it appears doma will get tossed in the dust bin...
412
412
Feb 8, 2012
02/12
by
CURRENT
tv
eye 412
favorite 0
quote 0
administration did the right thing in pulling back from their defense of doma. we're making a lot of progress, and invariably something goes in front of the court i hope what david boyes has put togetrnd tedlslsen. >> let's tete t te presio ntpsint amam u wu wayay kearneyey today saiai he has not changed his position on this. >> yeah. >> now i know there is some other data out here from that gallon -- gallup poll, which is that 78% of liberals support gay marriage 65% of moderates support gay major -- marriage. so if you had to give president obama advice in the middle of an election should the president reverse his decision? >> i think he should do what he thinks -- well, i think he should do the right thing. as dr. king reminded us, it's always the right time to do the right thing and stand up on principlement you can't run the 90-yard dark as i said on equality, marriage is marriage f. we believe in full equality for some americans regardless of gender and ethnicity we need to believe that. >> what would you suggest? >> to do what's in the best interest of hi
administration did the right thing in pulling back from their defense of doma. we're making a lot of progress, and invariably something goes in front of the court i hope what david boyes has put togetrnd tedlslsen. >> let's tete t te presio ntpsint amam u wu wayay kearneyey today saiai he has not changed his position on this. >> yeah. >> now i know there is some other data out here from that gallon -- gallup poll, which is that 78% of liberals support gay marriage 65% of...
104
104
Dec 10, 2012
12/12
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 104
favorite 0
quote 0
if we first talk about doma, if it is struck down, what does that mean nationally? >> well, it means only that if you live in a state that permits same-sex marriage and you are in a same-sex marriage, that the federal government will recognize your marriage. doma does not require states to do anything. it doesn't require anybody to do anything. but right now it prevents the federal government from granting recognition to same-sex marriages like, for instance, in new york. if that is struck down, the people who are married in states that allow it will get full federal recognition. >> which is over more than 1,000 federal benefits that go along with that. >> it's very important. it would be very significant. >> jonathan, we talk about prop 8 in california. if that is struck down, does that mean marriage equality then for all intents and purposes is legal in all states? does what happens in california then change the relevance for 49 other states? >> well, this all gets to how the supreme court rules. you know, i think it was the ninth circuit -- the ninth circuit cour
if we first talk about doma, if it is struck down, what does that mean nationally? >> well, it means only that if you live in a state that permits same-sex marriage and you are in a same-sex marriage, that the federal government will recognize your marriage. doma does not require states to do anything. it doesn't require anybody to do anything. but right now it prevents the federal government from granting recognition to same-sex marriages like, for instance, in new york. if that is...
111
111
Jun 1, 2012
06/12
by
CURRENT
tv
eye 111
favorite 0
quote 0
what doma will do, what will happen when we get rid of doma is that gay and lesbian americans who are married will be treated like every other married couple. >> i'm just curious from your perspective, how big a part has the president's endorsement played in the movement for equality in your opinion? >> i would say that the president coming out in support of marriage equality has really liberated other folks who have also been evolving on the issue. by him making a statement and really allowing us to be a part of his evolution and his grappling between his faith and trying to reconcile his political beliefs and values, he's given license to everyone else who's on that journey to also find themselves on the side of equality. i think that has been really impactful and we've seen it in all of the polling around the nation in terms of the uptick and support for marriage equality. >> wow, it is incredible arc of history we're witnessing and participating in. thank you so much, aisha moodie mills for coming into the war room and for joining the battle with the good guys. and for you all out
what doma will do, what will happen when we get rid of doma is that gay and lesbian americans who are married will be treated like every other married couple. >> i'm just curious from your perspective, how big a part has the president's endorsement played in the movement for equality in your opinion? >> i would say that the president coming out in support of marriage equality has really liberated other folks who have also been evolving on the issue. by him making a statement and...
122
122
Nov 16, 2012
11/12
by
CSPAN2
tv
eye 122
favorite 0
quote 0
it consists of the doma challenges. one of them is one of the court court is most likely to grant review in. all these courts have found federal statutes to be unconstitutional in the supreme court has to resolve that. that is what it does. if it doesn't do that, doesn't do anything. so i think there is a question about which case will be -- the united states switched its position during the administration from defending doma to arguing that it's unconstitutional. and it has recommended to the courts that there are two cases, there are only two cases in which there has been a court of appeals. i think the windsor case is the more likely one in part because the justice department has recommended that. so i really think that that case will be -- that case will be heard. i will be extremely surprised if the supreme court does not grant review in a case. and that we do not get a decision on the constitutionality of doma. the other two things, the famous case, which shadows a little bit about, is the property case in califor
it consists of the doma challenges. one of them is one of the court court is most likely to grant review in. all these courts have found federal statutes to be unconstitutional in the supreme court has to resolve that. that is what it does. if it doesn't do that, doesn't do anything. so i think there is a question about which case will be -- the united states switched its position during the administration from defending doma to arguing that it's unconstitutional. and it has recommended to the...
297
297
Nov 30, 2012
11/12
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 297
favorite 0
quote 0
eight of them deal with the federal defense of marriage act, or doma. joining me now is chris geidner. the man who knows the supreme court inside and out, pete williams. pete, good to have you with us. break it down. which cases are we talking about, and how quickly might we find out whether they will move forward? >> reporter: well, if they're going to take any of these cases, thomas, it's very likely we'll find out this afternoon. and i think the most likely event here is that they will grant one of the cases that challenges the federal defense of marriage act. passed in 1966 by congress signed by president clinton, it defines marriage as for federal law purposes as only the legal union of one man and one woman. now, the practical effect of that is that in the nine states that now grant or soon will grant same-sex couples the legal right to get married, those couples are legally married under state law, but the federal government doesn't recognize their marriage, which means that they can't get survivors' benefits, they don't get tax benefits, they do
eight of them deal with the federal defense of marriage act, or doma. joining me now is chris geidner. the man who knows the supreme court inside and out, pete williams. pete, good to have you with us. break it down. which cases are we talking about, and how quickly might we find out whether they will move forward? >> reporter: well, if they're going to take any of these cases, thomas, it's very likely we'll find out this afternoon. and i think the most likely event here is that they will...
183
183
Dec 8, 2012
12/12
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 183
favorite 0
quote 0
>> the doma case is a much more easy case. all it does is to return congress to its original position of following whatever states say the definition of marriage are. so it was crafted because it's a movement. they tend to be pro-state's rights and the liberals are pro-gay so arguing towards the middle, these are justice kennedy's favorite things. that's clearly a fifth vote for this case. we assume. so i think everyone imagined everyone since appellate court struck it down, that it leads to the supreme court to review the case. everyone thought they would take the case. i think they are going to do the right thing and strike it down. the other case is much more complicated. the doma case doesn't affect any state decisions. where the perry case, the outcome -- >> that's the prop 8 case in california. >> exactly. thank you for helping me out there. the case says there's this definition passed by a ballot initiative that says that marriage is between one man and one woman. if the the supreme court goes broad on that and says the
>> the doma case is a much more easy case. all it does is to return congress to its original position of following whatever states say the definition of marriage are. so it was crafted because it's a movement. they tend to be pro-state's rights and the liberals are pro-gay so arguing towards the middle, these are justice kennedy's favorite things. that's clearly a fifth vote for this case. we assume. so i think everyone imagined everyone since appellate court struck it down, that it leads...
142
142
Apr 6, 2012
04/12
by
CSPAN3
tv
eye 142
favorite 0
quote 0
we have to get rid of doma but have to make progress in the states. we have to fight off more constitutional amendments that are headed our way. and we have to overturn those, that already exist. and at the same time, as fighting the federal doma, overturning things in the states, as i said before we have a lot of legal cases going. and i think sometimes people say well surely there will be a silver bullet, one of these cases will go through and wipe the whole thing out. that would be nice but i don't see it happening that way. the way i see it it's like an arcade game, have you ever been to arcade, the pony is running across, and you're throwing bean bags, all those ponies are running to the finish line of marriage equality and we will get there but we have to get every single horse across the finish line and we need your help to do it. [ applause ] >> as arlene spoke earlier during the luncheon, our fates are tied together particularly on ballot measures. we just heard two sets of ballot measures, we're not talking about anti-affirm a
we have to get rid of doma but have to make progress in the states. we have to fight off more constitutional amendments that are headed our way. and we have to overturn those, that already exist. and at the same time, as fighting the federal doma, overturning things in the states, as i said before we have a lot of legal cases going. and i think sometimes people say well surely there will be a silver bullet, one of these cases will go through and wipe the whole thing out. that would be nice but...
303
303
Dec 8, 2012
12/12
by
CNNW
tv
eye 303
favorite 0
quote 1
even the justice department won't defend doma. so they can wrap it just on invalidating doma without answering the question of the validity of same-sex marriage. that's an easy way to do it. that's what supreme court decisions often will resolve cases by. look at the procedural issue. this is an answer the american people want. the supreme court recognizes that. they will make a ruling on it. this court will decide this. >> hang on, guys. a wisconsin dad is on the hook for $90,000 in back child support. he had nine kids with six different women. what the judge said he can't do anymore until he pays up. legal guys will weigh in on that as well. >>> and the looming fiscal cliff. the president says raising money on the wealthiest americans could raise a trillion dollars. from the best players in history to the number 1 club in the world. the potential of manchester united unlocked. nyse euronext. unlocking the world's potential. since ameriprise financial was founded back in 1894, they've been committed to putting clients first. help
even the justice department won't defend doma. so they can wrap it just on invalidating doma without answering the question of the validity of same-sex marriage. that's an easy way to do it. that's what supreme court decisions often will resolve cases by. look at the procedural issue. this is an answer the american people want. the supreme court recognizes that. they will make a ruling on it. this court will decide this. >> hang on, guys. a wisconsin dad is on the hook for $90,000 in back...
145
145
Feb 11, 2012
02/12
by
KQED
tv
eye 145
favorite 0
quote 0
so it's quite possible that doma will be struck down before it gets -- doma requires states to recognize marriages that are performed in other states even if it's not legal in your state. it's going to be interesting. i think clearly things are moving. you look at the polls now. there's a slight plurality supporting gay marriage. that was not the case three, five years ago. certainly not when prop 8 passed. things are moving. it's part of the political gestalt changing a little bit. >> bottom line is, when can marriages start again, if at all? >> interesting question. it looks like the stay on the ruling will end on february 28th. which would mean theoretically they could begin on february 28th. you can be sure backers of prop 8 will go back into court, to the supreme court if necessary, to get that stay put back in place so there won't be any more same-sex marriages until this is finally resolved. >> the lone dissenting judge was a bush appointee? >> randy submit, bush-appointed in 2007, a mormon from pocatello. his dissent was narrow. he basically said, i'm not so sure there wasn't a n
so it's quite possible that doma will be struck down before it gets -- doma requires states to recognize marriages that are performed in other states even if it's not legal in your state. it's going to be interesting. i think clearly things are moving. you look at the polls now. there's a slight plurality supporting gay marriage. that was not the case three, five years ago. certainly not when prop 8 passed. things are moving. it's part of the political gestalt changing a little bit. >>...
125
125
May 10, 2012
05/12
by
CSPAN2
tv
eye 125
favorite 0
quote 0
>> under doma? >> if it is federal land or federal property, it would go against doma. >> i would yield back to mr. critz. before i do, may i simply say that the doma statute for marriage means one man and one woman. unless you have a statue, that would outlaw marriages or specifically authorize marriages, and federal parks, you can have a same-sex marriage in a federal park. that just happens. i will yield back to mr. critz. >> my question was just clarification. i do not understand what would happen -- because i don't think it is illegal. and i yield back. >> gentleman yields back. the chernow recognizes the congresswoman from california. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i to rise -- by, too, rise in opposition of this amendment. to think that we are spending time on this amendment when we have taken up hundreds of billions of dollars today without even a comment here or there -- it is somewhat striking, i think. i think the most important thing to appreciate is that this would only take place in state
>> under doma? >> if it is federal land or federal property, it would go against doma. >> i would yield back to mr. critz. before i do, may i simply say that the doma statute for marriage means one man and one woman. unless you have a statue, that would outlaw marriages or specifically authorize marriages, and federal parks, you can have a same-sex marriage in a federal park. that just happens. i will yield back to mr. critz. >> my question was just clarification. i do...
SFGTV: San Francisco Government Television
144
144
Dec 6, 2012
12/12
by
SFGTV
tv
eye 144
favorite 0
quote 0
this additional tax on same sex domestic partners adds another sting to doma. these next few weeks will be significant forjíÑ the lgbt community and those who stand with them as the supreme court will decide whether to -- proposition 8 perry case and various doma cases however i don't believe we should stand still while this discrimination continues. i look forward to working with everyone on the board to the rest i submit. >> clerk calvillo: thank you. supervisor chu. >> supervisor chu: thank you very much. i have an empirrative item later on and i want to speak to it. it is a purely commendatory item. i am joined by supervisor elsbernd in sponsoring this. i simply want to recognize the grand reopening of the sunset rec center in my district located in the the heart of the sunset district and is actually our own full scale rec center that is available. we have many playgrounds, play fields, but we don't necessarily have a rec center so this one has been under construction foru the last two years. it was part of the 2008 clean that the voters approved and is
this additional tax on same sex domestic partners adds another sting to doma. these next few weeks will be significant forjíÑ the lgbt community and those who stand with them as the supreme court will decide whether to -- proposition 8 perry case and various doma cases however i don't believe we should stand still while this discrimination continues. i look forward to working with everyone on the board to the rest i submit. >> clerk calvillo: thank you. supervisor chu. >>...
140
140
Oct 1, 2012
10/12
by
CSPAN
tv
eye 140
favorite 0
quote 0
doma, there's a lot of room for them to do bigger steps. they could just say there is an equal protection right to same- sex marriage. i don't think there's any chance they would do that. i think whenever they do, it will be a smaller step. i don't think they will call it a big step, but they will present it as a modification of existing doctrine. >> on the topic of big steps in small steps, its often part with the prejudicial activism and i don't think we should do that in a knee-jerk way. i think the big step is often the logically necessary step and a small step can be incoherent. the big step is often times the right answer and you should not reject it just of the grounds that it's a big step. >> the federalist society endorses judicial activism, but let me ask you this question. it does it matter how the justices get along with each other after what were apparently some somewhat surprised if not her feelings at the end of last term? does that matter in terms of what we will see this term or is that forgotten and everyone is happy now?
doma, there's a lot of room for them to do bigger steps. they could just say there is an equal protection right to same- sex marriage. i don't think there's any chance they would do that. i think whenever they do, it will be a smaller step. i don't think they will call it a big step, but they will present it as a modification of existing doctrine. >> on the topic of big steps in small steps, its often part with the prejudicial activism and i don't think we should do that in a knee-jerk...